Are hunter numbers down?

[lastlight]

This seems to be said on a regular basis within the hunting community, but is it accurate? Not according to the USFWS annual reports.

This graph demonstrates that other than a 10 year blip between 1975 and 1985 hunter numbers might be higher than ever. At the same the acres of huntable land (especially non paid, publicly accessible) have been on the decline.



FYI this survey data can be found here https://www.fws.gov/program/national-survey-fishing-hunting-and-wildlife-associated-recreation-fhwar

I see the arguement that, as a percentage of the US population, hunters may be on the decline. I also think there is so many variables between states and licenses sold. Are lifetime licenses counted each year? Are there more big game hunters now than small game? etc.

Then there is the Andrew McKean (who is an R3 advocate) Outdoor life article on how we have no idea how many hunters there actually are in America.

So where does the "We need more hunters" and "Hunter numbers are down" sentiment come from?

 

[SilentBirdHunter]

If you start in the 1970s the slope of a regression line is negative and statistically significant (p <0.05).

 

[Pucky Freak]

If huntable acres are plummeting, it probably doesn’t matter if hunter numbers are slightly down or slightly up.

 

[howl]

It comes from.government employees wanting increased revenue by increased taxes, er I mean licenses sales.

Our DNR scouts for and pays YouTubers to do episodes here. So much of their funding is tied to license sales, their salaries are effectively tied to sales.

 

[HONEYBADGER]

The narrative from government agencies and their proxies that we needed more hunters was a lie. There are too many for the resource to support as it is.

 

[Nick87]

If huntable acres are plummeting, it probably doesn’t matter if hunter numbers are slightly down or slightly up.

This, without showing accessible acreage I don't see how license sold is relevant.

 

[jt13]

It makes sense in my head when looking at it this way:

Stagnant or decreasing license sales with an increasing population means that hunters are a decreasing percentage of the population. As the wildlife and public lands are managed by the states and federal government, there is a drive to keep hunters well represented in the voting booth. Keeping interest in the outdoors at a high level may help ensure that hunting remains a lawful recreational activity and primary wildlife management tool.

All that being said, I believe any actual decreases in interest and participation are taking place east of the Mississippi and skewing any nationwide survey like the one you posted. Anyone with eyes can can see that most western game populations and public hunting opportunities are taking about all they can handle.

 

[RunNGunSC]

I wonder how multi state hunters are counted. I have an active license in 6 states. Could an increase in multi state hunters hide or mute the overall declining trend?

 

[TOGIE]

I wonder how multi state hunters are counted. I have an active license in 6 states. Could an increase in multi state hunters hide or mute the overall declining trend?

i've always been skeptical they're properly correcting for this as well.

 

[FI460]

I wonder how multi state hunters are counted. I have an active license in 6 states. Could an increase in multi state hunters hide or mute the overall declining trend?

I think the numbers from the USFWS are a survey.

Matt Rinella mentioned in his post that it's not based off of state license sales.

I'd imagine we can find the publication. I'll try and track it down later today.

 

[rjthehunter]

Here's a good way to look at it. Since 1960, the overall number of hunting licenses increased by 8.6% up to 2020. While the US population increased 83.4%. Overall, interest is declining.

The Decline of Hunting and Fishing - Wildlife for All

The Decline of Hunting and Fishing. The number of hunters and anglers has declined in actual numbers and as a percentage of the population.

wildlifeforall.us

I wonder how multi state hunters are counted. I have an active license in 6 states. Could an increase in multi state hunters hide or mute the overall declining trend?

Great question. It seems like a lot of this is tracked by hunting licenses bought. If I'm hunting in 3 states or 4 states, I'm guessing each license is being counted.

 

[Nick87]

Here's a good way to look at it. Since 1960, the overall number of hunting licenses increased by 8.6% up to 2020. While the US population increased 83.4%. Overall, interest is declining.

The Decline of Hunting and Fishing - Wildlife for All

The Decline of Hunting and Fishing. The number of hunters and anglers has declined in actual numbers and as a percentage of the population.

wildlifeforall.us

Great question. It seems like a lot of this is tracked by hunting licenses bought. If I'm hunting in 3 states or 4 states, I'm guessing each license is being counted.

How many acres were accessible in 1960 vs today. Also how many acres were accessible without charge?

 

[BuckRut]

Were these all big game hunters? Is this graph and accurate representation of western hunting or are the numbers inflated by large increases in midwest and east coast hunter? I wouldn't put a lot of weight in this to tell you that there are more western hunters now than there ever were.

 

[xcskier_hunter]

I agree with many of the above thoughts. I had hunting licenses in multiple states I did not hunt due to time constraints just because you need to buy them ahead of time and the unpredictable nature of draws.

Another problem with the data in this form is that it does not consider how many days someone hunts in a season. In many of the Midwest states it was historically gun season that drove license sales, and the majority of hunters probably only hunted the opening weekend.

With the legalization of crossbows and increased popularity and efficacy of archery I think many of the more serious former gun hunters now also hunt during archery season and, as a consequence, hunt more total days while what we've likely lost is the more casual gun-only hunters that are unwilling to spend money on a lease or deal with crowded public land.

While the states may care most about total licenses sold, as hunters it seems more relevant to look at the total numbers of days hunted, as one person hunting 10 days is effectively the same as 5 people hunting two days (unless these 5 people are abnormally successful at filling their tags). And in Midwestern states where doe tags are effectively unlimited, that one serious hunter might be able to kill more deer than the 5 casual hunters combined.

 

[rjthehunter]

How many acres were accessible in 1960 vs today. Also how many acres were accessible without charge?

Good question. There's about 640 million acres of federally managed lands right now.

Without wasting too much time looking, there was 24 million lost between 2001-2017. So Idk, maybe 100-150 million lost? Tough to say without any data!

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1UW08Y/

 

[Nick87]

Good question. There's about 640 million acres of federally managed lands right now.

Without wasting too much time looking, there was 24 million lost between 2001-2017. So Idk, maybe 100-150 million lost? Tough to say without any data!

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1UW08Y/

That's just federally managed. Even more I suspect on private.

 

[seeth07]

Good question. There's about 640 million acres of federally managed lands right now.

Without wasting too much time looking, there was 24 million lost between 2001-2017. So Idk, maybe 100-150 million lost? Tough to say without any data!

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1UW08Y/

But there has been a lot of acreage opened up as well.

 

[seeth07]

How many acres were accessible in 1960 vs today. Also how many acres were accessible without charge?

The actual amount of private acreage that was hunted in 1960 vs today is probably pretty insignificant. Developments have surely taken land that is now unusable by wildlife at a huntable level sense but on the grand scheme of the nation as a whole - there wouldn't be a large difference. There also is likely more private acreage now that is "no hunting at all" due to the landowners perspective on allowing it but again, its probably pretty insignificant.

I know you are trying to point out that getting permission on private is getting harder and harder. That however is a separate issue.

 

[atlas]

Then there is the Andrew McKean (who is an R3 advocate) Outdoor life article on how we have no idea how many hunters there actually are in America.

McKean advocates for more hunters and more money for Block Management. Yet has a ranch that isn't enrolled.

 

[Nick87]

The actual amount of private acreage that was hunted in 1960 vs today is probably pretty insignificant. Developments have surely taken land that is now unusable by wildlife at a huntable level sense but on the grand scheme of the nation as a whole - there wouldn't be a large difference. There also is likely more private acreage now that is "no hunting at all" due to the landowners perspective on allowing it but again, its probably pretty insignificant.

I know you are trying to point out that getting permission on private is getting harder and harder. That however is a separate issue.

I'd disagree. I'd say it's pretty significant. Especially when you go back to 1960 around bigger town and cities. There have been the bigger part of counties that were developed since then that were once huntable. Add to the fact that now instead of most guys hunting a family or friends forty doesn't happen near as much. Now one or two guys control access to hundreds of acres. Even the same huntable acres from 60 years ago don't equate the same way they used to. It may be a separate issue but it's far and wide the number one reason anytime someone hangs it up or hunts less which is what the thread is about.